Slashdot Mirror


Second Amendment Questioned

dheera writes "Attorneys in Washington, DC question the scope of the Second Amendment in the first case in nearly 70 years, citing that the right to bear arms only applies to 'a well regulated militia.' 'We interpret the Second Amendment in military terms,' said Todd Kim, the District's solicitor general."

8 of 1,471 comments (clear)

  1. US DOJ says by RevDobbs · · Score: 5, Informative

    The United States Department of Justice says that the 2nd amendment is an individual right.

    1. Re:US DOJ says by troll+-1 · · Score: 5, Informative

      The United States Department of Justice says that the 2nd amendment is an individual right.

      That's interesting because it's apparently wrong. Morton Grove, Illinois banned hand guns in 1981 and the ban withstood a constitutional challenge in the case of Quilici v. Village of Morton Grove.

    2. Re:US DOJ says by Agelmar · · Score: 5, Informative

      I call BS. In this year's rankings, DC is #19, behind cities like Memphis, Trenton, and Kansas City. DC has improved greatly since the handgun ban was passed.

      As for the murder rate - it definitely does not drop immediately once you cross the border. I'll grant you that the Virginia border takes you into reasonable areas for the most part, but if you go across the Maryland border into PG County, don't tell me that you're going somewhere safe. Frankly, much of the blight is being pushed out of DC into VA and MD due simply to the increasing cost of downtown real-estate. Ten years ago I would never have considered living in Southwest, but now the area is undergoing massive investment, and in my time living there I never had any problems.

  2. Personal safety by MSG · · Score: 5, Informative

    That is bullshit, and I'll tell you why. The courts have established that "Police Have No Duty To Protect Individuals".

    Just reading about the case history behind this makes me spitting mad. It takes a stong constitution to even read that entire compilation.

    Everyone has the right to defend their safety. In my eyes, everyone has the responsibility to defend their safety.

  3. Re:Now is the time to define. . . by hey! · · Score: 5, Informative

    What a 'well regulated' militia is. Probably has to be set up to defend nat'l safety.


    Not necessarily.

    Think of what the country would be like if you had no local police or state police; you are also in a country that includes other nations (Indians) some of them hostile.

    One of the most important functions of a militia would be to provide for local security and peace.

    We have to be careful about attributing modern viewpoints to the founders, or pretending they all thought the same way. None of them subscribed to libertarianism as we know it, although some (Jefferson) were closer than others (Adams). It isn't that they didn't believe in individual liberty -- they did. But they also had a stronger attachement than we do in the idea of community liberty.

    It's interesting to read about the operation of militias in the Revolution. They operated in a primitive democratic way, choosing their leaders from the respected men of the community; nor did those leaders excercise autocratic powers. When not actually in battle, matters of strategy and tactics were debated and even voted upon. This practice infuriated Washington at first, who saw it as undisciplined. However he adjusted his style of command to this, and was a better commander because of it. The lessons he learned from this also helped him form an effective working relationship with the Continental Congress (Adams was particularly nettlesome), an example which was very important in the development of the US Constitution.

    In any case, militias were not mobs or random collections of individuals. They were the defensive organ of the community. It is not that they had no discipline, they had a different kind of discipline, one of community responsibility, reputation, and mutual reliance.

    Community liberty is not incompatible with individual liberty, but sometimes they do conflict, especially when the more influential in the community are able to claim greater protection. In the late 19th century, the national guard was used against strikers in Andrew Carnegie's steel mills.

    The right of private firearm ownership is not, in my opinion, not directly covered by the Second Amendment, which I believe is about the right of communities to arm themselves. Most quotations from the founders that are used to support private firearm ownership are more accurately read in that light.

    However, that doesn't mean it is not protected by the Bill of Rights. After all, there is constitutional right of privacy that can be asserted against the government, even though the legal concept of privacy did not exist at the time. The right to privacy is implicit in the third, fourth, fifth and fourteenth amendemnts. The fact that this is implicit makes it no less enforceable, because of the ninth amendment.

    Personal firearm ownership is implicit in the second amendment. That it cannot be taken away unreasonably is implicit in the due process clause of the fifth amendment. That this implicit right has equal force as other rights is established in the ninth.

    --
    Post may contain irony: discontinue use if experiencing mood swings, nausea or elevated blood pressure.
  4. Some statistics... by malaxi · · Score: 5, Informative
    I wrote a thing up for my book club a year or two ago when we started talking about gun control and how dangerous "just having guns around" is, so I looked into it. I know this is long, but maybe some of you will find the numbers different than your intuition tells you. (Disclaimer: I am pro-gun).

    These numbers are all from the CDC.

    http://webapp.cdc.gov/sasweb/ncipc/mortrate10_sy.h tml

    My queries are for the years 1999-2002 (all they have), the entire U.S., all races, both sexes, all ages. (four year totals)

    Unintentional death by falling : 57,760
    Unintentional Pedestrian deaths: 24,079
    Unintentional Drowning : 13,739
    Unintentional death by burning : 13,642
    Unintentional Firearms deaths : 3,164
    Unintentional Bicyclist deaths : 3,099

    You can also break it down by age range. If we're worried about the teen years, we can look at ages 12-18. (four year totals)

    Unintentional Pedestrian deaths: 1,561
    Unintentional Drowning : 1,495
    Unintentional Firearms deaths : 494
    Unintentional Bicyclist deaths : 453
    Unintentional death by burning : 423
    Unintentional death by falling : 306

    Younger still, ages 1-11: (four year totals)

    Unintentional Pedestrian deaths: 2,118
    Unintentional Drowning : 2,870
    Unintentional death by burning : 1,920
    Unintentional Bicyclist deaths : 371
    Unintentional death by falling : 292
    Unintentional Firearms deaths : 164

    Accident-wise, young kids have a lot more to worry about than guns. And teenagers are almost as likely to die on their bicycles. God forbid they're bicycling to the swimming pool... or even worse, *walking* to the swimming pool ... but yes, there are gun accidents.

    Non-accidental deaths:

    It's interesting to note that more than half of violent deaths attributed to firearms are suicide. Whenever you read an article in the media that mentions the number of gun deaths it's a good bet that they're including suicides.

    • Violent deaths by firearm: 113,160 (includes suicides)
    • Suicide by firearm: 67,162

    Now I, personally, don't mind if people kill themselves. More power to them. I do agree that that there is a lower barrier to entry when using a gun and understand that depressed people might not be the best people to own guns, but gun control isn't really the solution to depression.

    So, anyway, taking out suicides leaves us with:

    • "legal intervention": 1,192 (cops killing criminals?)
    • Homicide by firearm: 44,806 (11.2K per year)

    As compared to

    • Non-firearm homicides: 26,794 (6.7K per year)

    So, more people are definitely intentionally killed by guns than by any other single cause, roughly 11K people per year.

    But...

    How many times are guns used defensively? Since defensive gun use isn't something that is reported (like an offensive gun use is), numbers are harder to find. Here is the page I have bookmarked with the only numbers I've ever seen. (refers to Gary Kleck's survey and a DOJ-sponsored study, and has a table of the results of 13 other surveys). (Gary Kleck is a criminologist at FSU - and, no, he's not an NRA member. http://www.criminology.fsu.edu/p/faculty-gary-klec k.php)

    Summary: Kleck thinks defensive gun use happens 2.5M times per year, other surveys listed range between 770K and 3.6M. The DOJ study thinks it's 1.5M times per year.

    Let's aim low and go with 1M defensive uses per year. The question posed at the book club was "when does the ratio become w

  5. Re:Now is the time to define. . . by Crudely_Indecent · · Score: 5, Informative

    The gov abandoned the idea of a state regulated militia in favor of a federally regulated national guard. If the right to bear arms only applies to a state regulated militia, then we lost our right to bear arms many years ago. If the DoJ interpretation of the 2nd amendment stands, then we still have it.

    What we should be asking is "WHY?" Why does the government want an unarmed population? The founding fathers made it clear that the purpose of our government was to protect rights. They also warn about modifications to the 2nd amendment.

    "A free people [claim] their rights as derived from the laws of nature, and not as the gift of their chief magistrate." - Thomas Jefferson

    "[H]owever weak our country may be, I hope we shall never sacrifice our liberties." - Alexander Hamilton

    "A strong body makes the mind strong. As to the species of exercises, I advise the gun. While this gives moderate exercise to the body, it gives boldness, enterprise and independence to the mind. Games played with the ball, and others of that nature, are too violent for the body and stamp no character on the mind. Let your gun therefore be your constant companion of your walks." - Thomas Jefferson

    "No freeman shall ever be debarred the use of arms." -Thomas Jefferson: Draft Virginia Constitution, 1776.

    "[The Constitution preserves] the advantage of being armed which Americans possess over the people of almost every other nation...(where) the governments are afraid to trust the people with arms." -James Madison,The Federalist Papers, No. 46.

    "I ask, Sir, what is the militia? It is the whole people. To disarm the people is the best and most effectual way to enslave them." -George Mason, Co-author of the Second Amendment

    "The constitutions of most of our States assert that all power is inherent in the people; that ... it is their right and duty to be at all times armed; ... " -Thomas Jefferson

    "The greatest danger to American freedom is a government that ignores the Constitution." -Thomas Jefferson

    Gun confiscation leads to a loss of freedom, increased crime, and the government moving to the left. This has already happened in England and Australia. After Great Britain banned most guns in 1997, making armed self-defense punishable as murder, violence skyrocketed because criminals know that law abiding citizens have been disarmed. Armed crime rose 10% in 1998. The Sunday Times of London reported on the new black market in guns: "Up to 3 million illegal guns are in circulation in Britain, leading to a rise in drive-by shootings and gangland-style execution." There has been such a heavy increase in the use of knives for violent attacks that new laws have been passed giving police the power to search anyone for knives in designated areas.

    Where are we going? Who is taking us there? Should we be kicking and screaming?

    --


    "Lame" - Galaxar
  6. Re:Thank God for that by RyanFenton · · Score: 5, Informative

    The UK has the fastest growing rate of gun crimes in all of western civilization.

    Yes. The reason the rates increase so much, is because the actual numbers are so low.

    Gun Death Rates per Nation

    If you're trying to be honest about the statistics, avoid harping too much about relative increases in rates - that's like bragging about your brother growing richer faster at a rate faster than Bill Gates.

    Ryan Fenton